• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

OT: Pentagon 911

Started by BronzeBruce13,

26 posts in this topic

RedRaven

RedRaven

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Amazing you've never seen this particular turd in the crowded toilet bowl of conspiracy theories surrounding 911. I 'make of it' an indictment of the general incompetence of our population that people believe this garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shield

Shield

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Amazing you've never seen this particular turd in the crowded toilet bowl of conspiracy theories surrounding 911. I 'make of it' an indictment of the general incompetence of our population that people believe this garbage.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. Nice touch with Hitler's voice in the background too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FatComicMafia

FatComicMafia

Posted
Posted

That rumor and others have been around right from the beginning. In General , a lot of things the US had been involved with that was denied in the begining, sometimes comes into the light otherwise. Who knows with this one.

In regards to the second comment, no surprised considering the board members location.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted

 

One thing that bugs me about that, is when they do a close-up of the actual footage, the plane is totally obscured by the cement barrier - then they fast-forward through the rest. foreheadslap.gif

 

There are piles of film out there - can no one just produce a close-up of the actual plane before it hits the Pentagon that verifies it's the right aircraft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKB

CKB

Posted
Posted

 

One thing that bugs me about that, is when they do a close-up of the actual footage, the plane is totally obscured by the cement barrier - then they fast-forward through the rest. foreheadslap.gif

 

There are piles of film out there - can no one just produce a close-up of the actual plane before it hits the Pentagon that verifies it's the right aircraft?

 

You think they fast forward, but that's frame to frame. The plane was moving at 500 Mph+. Even the drivers on the roads the plane went over were confused by what they saw. It's hard to know what something the size of a building moving at 500MPh+ a short distance away will look like.

 

One frame the plane is obscured behind the barrier, next frame the plane is completely in the building. 1/30th of second (or whatever the frame rate of that security camera was. Could be slower.)

 

The only known video showing the plane where it may be somewhat recognizable is the video from a gas station. I don't believe they have ever released that, but it is only a matter of time before FOIA kicks in.

 

The simulation linked above is absolutely compelling. The only study that completely accounts for all the downed light poles and the smoke trail from one engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I've heard about this theory before, and it seems that there is a fair amount of convenient rhetoric thrown in from both sides to support their own agendas.

 

Here is what I've made from it from the very first time this theory surfaced.

 

I'm not as dismissive about the plain fact that the Pentagon has one of the best, if not the best, guarded and controlled air space programs on the planet.

 

If reports from the trade center attacks trickled down to mainstream news in a matter of minutes after the first plane collided into the world trade center, it would have certainly arrived in the hands of the Pentagon much sooner than mainstream news reports and CNN coverage.

 

If the Pentagon's air defence is worth two bits, it would have made sure anything remotely close to its air space would have been monitored.

 

As I see it, it would not be out of the realm of possibility that someone in the Pentagon is tasked with needing to make tough decisions, including to defend the Pentagon against any air space attack, and that extends to any carrier plane that might be targetting its facilities.

 

If in fact the Boeing 757 commercial airplane was downed to defend the Pentagon against an act of terrorism, the decision would need to have been quick, and any decision such as shooting a plane down with hundreds of passengers in it would of course spell political suicide.

 

How does a plane just dissapear? No one will ever know for sure what the situation was surrounding the AA Flight 77, especially because the evidence looks like its been tampered with for the convenience of both the conspiracy nuts, and security freaks alike.

 

And science fiction aside, one way to explain a plane disappearing would be through particle beam acceleration or directed energy weaponry -- a form of weaponry that has been in the US militaries hands for nearly half a century.

 

"Death ray" or particle beam technology has been coopted in to the US militaries weaponry, and as far as I can recall from a number of different sources, this is not restricted to R&D only -- in fact, many believe they have already equipped on a number of fighter planes and drones (remotely operated aircrafts).

 

Let just say if I wanted something to disappear into thin air, particle beam or directed energy weaponry would be one way to achieve it:

 

Drone plane kills terror suspects

 

Homing In on Laser Weapons

 

US fighters tooling up with lasers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wally's Comics

Wally's Comics

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I've heard about this theory before, and it seems that there is a fair amount of convenient rhetoric thrown in from both sides to support their own agendas.

 

Here is what I've made from it from the very first time this theory surfaced.

 

I'm not as dismissive about the plain fact that the Pentagon has one of the best, if not the best, guarded and controlled air space programs on the planet.

 

If reports from the trade center attacks trickled down to mainstream news in a matter of minutes after the first plane collided into the world trade center, it would have certainly arrived in the hands of the Pentagon much sooner than mainstream news reports and CNN coverage.

 

If the Pentagon's air defence is worth two bits, it would have made sure anything remotely close to its air space would have been monitored.

 

As I see it, it would not be out of the realm of possibility that someone in the Pentagon is tasked with needing to make tough decisions, including to defend the Pentagon against any air space attack, and that extends to any carrier plane that might be targetting its facilities.

 

If in fact the Boeing 757 commercial airplane was downed to defend the Pentagon against an act of terrorism, the decision would need to have been quick, and any decision such as shooting a plane down with hundreds of passengers in it would of course spell political suicide.

 

How does a plane just dissapear? No one will ever know for sure what the situation was surrounding the AA Flight 77, especially because the evidence looks like its been tampered with for the convenience of both the conspiracy nuts, and security freaks alike.

 

And science fiction aside, one way to explain a plane disappearing would be through particle beam acceleration or directed energy weaponry -- a form of weaponry that has been in the US militaries hands for nearly half a century.

 

"Death ray" or particle beam technology has been coopted in to the US militaries weaponry, and as far as I can recall from a number of different sources, this is not restricted to R&D only -- in fact, many believe they have already equipped on a number of fighter planes and drones (remotely operated aircrafts).

 

Let just say if I wanted something to disappear into thin air, particle beam or directed energy weaponry would be one way to achieve it:

 

Drone plane kills terror suspects

 

Homing In on Laser Weapons

 

US fighters tooling up with lasers

 

 

So you're say that America has a "Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator"???

 

marvin_martian.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shadroch

shadroch

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I've heard about this theory before, and it seems that there is a fair amount of convenient rhetoric thrown in from both sides to support their own agendas.

 

Here is what I've made from it from the very first time this theory surfaced.

 

I'm not as dismissive about the plain fact that the Pentagon has one of the best, if not the best, guarded and controlled air space programs on the planet.

 

If reports from the trade center attacks trickled down to mainstream news in a matter of minutes after the first plane collided into the world trade center, it would have certainly arrived in the hands of the Pentagon much sooner than mainstream news reports and CNN coverage.

 

If the Pentagon's air defence is worth two bits, it would have made sure anything remotely close to its air space would have been monitored.

 

As I see it, it would not be out of the realm of possibility that someone in the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pentagon is tasked with needing to make tough decisions, including to defend the Pentagon against any air space attack, and that extends to any carrier plane that might be targetting its facilities.

 

If in fact the Boeing 757 commercial airplane was downed to defend the Pentagon against an act of terrorism, the decision would need to have been quick, and any decision such as shooting a plane down with hundreds of passengers in it would of course spell political suicide.

 

How does a plane just dissapear? No one will ever know for sure what the situation was surrounding the AA Flight 77, especially because the evidence looks like its been tampered with for the convenience of both the conspiracy nuts, and security freaks alike.

 

And science fiction aside, one way to explain a plane disappearing would be through particle beam acceleration or directed energy weaponry -- a form of weaponry that has been in the US militaries hands for nearly half a century.

 

"Death ray" or particle beam technology has been coopted in to the US militaries weaponry, and as far as I can recall from a number of different sources, this is not restricted to R&D only -- in fact, many believe they have already equipped on a number of fighter planes and drones (remotely operated aircrafts).

 

Let just say if I wanted something to disappear into thin air, particle beam or directed energy weaponry would be one way to achieve it:

 

Drone plane kills terror suspects

 

Homing In on Laser Weapons

 

US fighters tooling up with lasers

 

 

 

So you are suggesting that not only did the US blow a commercial jet out of the sky,using a secret weapon,but then they shot a missle into the side of the Pentagon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I've heard about this theory before, and it seems that there is a fair amount of convenient rhetoric thrown in from both sides to support their own agendas.

 

Here is what I've made from it from the very first time this theory surfaced.

 

I'm not as dismissive about the plain fact that the Pentagon has one of the best, if not the best, guarded and controlled air space programs on the planet.

 

If reports from the trade center attacks trickled down to mainstream news in a matter of minutes after the first plane collided into the world trade center, it would have certainly arrived in the hands of the Pentagon much sooner than mainstream news reports and CNN coverage.

 

If the Pentagon's air defence is worth two bits, it would have made sure anything remotely close to its air space would have been monitored.

 

As I see it, it would not be out of the realm of possibility that someone in the Pentagon is tasked with needing to make tough decisions, including to defend the Pentagon against any air space attack, and that extends to any carrier plane that might be targetting its facilities.

 

If in fact the Boeing 757 commercial airplane was downed to defend the Pentagon against an act of terrorism, the decision would need to have been quick, and any decision such as shooting a plane down with hundreds of passengers in it would of course spell political suicide.

 

How does a plane just dissapear? No one will ever know for sure what the situation was surrounding the AA Flight 77, especially because the evidence looks like its been tampered with for the convenience of both the conspiracy nuts, and security freaks alike.

 

And science fiction aside, one way to explain a plane disappearing would be through particle beam acceleration or directed energy weaponry -- a form of weaponry that has been in the US militaries hands for nearly half a century.

 

"Death ray" or particle beam technology has been coopted in to the US militaries weaponry, and as far as I can recall from a number of different sources, this is not restricted to R&D only -- in fact, many believe they have already equipped on a number of fighter planes and drones (remotely operated aircrafts).

 

Let just say if I wanted something to disappear into thin air, particle beam or directed energy weaponry would be one way to achieve it:

 

Drone plane kills terror suspects

 

Homing In on Laser Weapons

 

US fighters tooling up with lasers

 

 

So you're say that America has a "Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator"???

 

marvin_martian.gif

 

By all accounts, and if there is any truth to them, then they're sitting on the mother bee transmogrifier thumbsup2.gif

 

zap1.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I've heard about this theory before, and it seems that there is a fair amount of convenient rhetoric thrown in from both sides to support their own agendas.

 

Here is what I've made from it from the very first time this theory surfaced.

 

I'm not as dismissive about the plain fact that the Pentagon has one of the best, if not the best, guarded and controlled air space programs on the planet.

 

If reports from the trade center attacks trickled down to mainstream news in a matter of minutes after the first plane collided into the world trade center, it would have certainly arrived in the hands of the Pentagon much sooner than mainstream news reports and CNN coverage.

 

If the Pentagon's air defence is worth two bits, it would have made sure anything remotely close to its air space would have been monitored.

 

As I see it, it would not be out of the realm of possibility that someone in the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pentagon is tasked with needing to make tough decisions, including to defend the Pentagon against any air space attack, and that extends to any carrier plane that might be targetting its facilities.

 

If in fact the Boeing 757 commercial airplane was downed to defend the Pentagon against an act of terrorism, the decision would need to have been quick, and any decision such as shooting a plane down with hundreds of passengers in it would of course spell political suicide.

 

How does a plane just dissapear? No one will ever know for sure what the situation was surrounding the AA Flight 77, especially because the evidence looks like its been tampered with for the convenience of both the conspiracy nuts, and security freaks alike.

 

And science fiction aside, one way to explain a plane disappearing would be through particle beam acceleration or directed energy weaponry -- a form of weaponry that has been in the US militaries hands for nearly half a century.

 

"Death ray" or particle beam technology has been coopted in to the US militaries weaponry, and as far as I can recall from a number of different sources, this is not restricted to R&D only -- in fact, many believe they have already equipped on a number of fighter planes and drones (remotely operated aircrafts).

 

Let just say if I wanted something to disappear into thin air, particle beam or directed energy weaponry would be one way to achieve it:

 

Drone plane kills terror suspects

 

Homing In on Laser Weapons

 

US fighters tooling up with lasers

 

 

 

So you are suggesting that not only did the US blow a commercial jet out of the sky,using a secret weapon,but then they shot a missle into the side of the Pentagon?

 

Glad you said it, and not me, otherwise I might be confused as being another conspiracy nut... thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BronzeBruce13

BronzeBruce13

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I found the following link pretty interesting.

This time I checked Snopes.com (before posting) and there was nothing…

 

Pentagon 911

 

What do you make of this?

893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Amazing you've never seen this particular turd in the crowded toilet bowl of conspiracy theories surrounding 911. I 'make of it' an indictment of the general incompetence of our population that people believe this garbage.

 

 

Unless there are MAJOR happenings going on, I don't watch the news or read a paper. Over 10 years ago I stopped. I just couldn't take the daily stream of death, despair, child molestations and other negative/alarming stories selected for their effect on ratings. It brought me down considerably.

 

I posted this because aside from not knowing if there was any truth to it, a few things about the video seemed odd to me if there was. Particularly the absence of debris and eyewitness accounts about the possibility of a missile.

Since I only watched the news for about 3-4 days after 911, I wondered if this video had made its rounds and what the consensus on it was. I checked Snopes.com but they had nothing on it.

 

I figured I'd find answers from the well-informed forumites here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing